all 21 comments

[–]d3rr 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (4 children)

How did AJ damage these parents' reputations? Seems like a weak defamation case.

[–]Popper[S] 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

he called the one guy a crisis actor

they also said he failed to provide information. I think it was basically asking "if that guy is a crisis actor, why did you think that, what proof or evidence for that made you say that?" Like even if it was just Alex's opinion, why, what did he base that on, not even giving any info on it makes it look bad so then he might as well say he is guilty of the charges and pay his fine. I honestly don't know why he wouldn't try to fight it because there are a lot of fishy things going on with the Sandy Hook case where he could explain why he had an opinion the way he did. It is hard to prove defamation but if a guy doesn't even try to defend himself I don't blame a judge for finding him guilty. The whole thing is weird IMO.

They also accused him of fomenting violence and causing sandy hook parents to get death threats sent at them, that is harder to prove, it was like when Trump said we'll fight like hell and dems said that he then ordered his followers to attack the capitol, but law experts explained why that is protected free speech.

[–]d3rr 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This is super weird. Maybe AJ's handlers told him to back off and lose the case by not trying.

he called the one guy a crisis actor

ahh, that's something substantial.

[–]Popper[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

it's like, Alex wasn't the only one thinking that, the video where the guy was laughing then stopped to give his speech to the news. If I was AJ I'd have brought a tv into the court room and then showed that as evidence as to why he said the guy was a crisis actor.

[–]socks 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

AJ doesn't have to worry about money, as he'll be paid handsomely for continuing to spread disinformation. For him, there is no such thing as bad press, or a bad lawsuit. He's a reminder that the .01%, Russian oligarchs, Israel influencers, Big Corp and others need him to distract, discredit and try to humiliate the 99%, all while appearing that he's part of the 99%. Referring to someone as a crisis actor and losing a lawsuit about it is nothing in the broad scheme of his ultra-right wing purpose, to fuck over the 99%. Any media outlet that supports him should be boycotted, because they otherwise help him incite violence. He's a traitor to the US.

[–]fschmidt 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

Libel means to intentionally make false statements to harm someone's reputation. Alex Jones's statements about Sandy Hook weren't intentionally false (he was just a confused guy) and don't harm anyone's reputation. On the other hand, you insinuating that Jones is lying and withholding evidence is an intentional false statement harming Alex Jones's reputation, so you are guilty of libel in this post. But don't worry, the corrupt system is on your side and against truth and justice.

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

I don't think he is lying I am saying I have no idea why he said what he said.

Alex is withholding evidence and that is a fact, I'm not sure why though, I made this post as a way to see what other people thought.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (9 children)

Alex is withholding evidence and that is a fact

More libel from you. If it is a fact, prove it. Here is Alex Jones's side:

https://banned.video/watch?id=61566ecd39352e25909cc8b6

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

so is he just saying he shouldn't have to present evidence cuz it was before a judge and not a jury? Even if it's just a judge, why not present evidence and then win the case?

I'm honestly asking because I didn't know. Alex Jones also got sued by Alefantis and then apologized to him. Why not also fight that and present evidence of pizzagate? I feel he backs down too easy.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Just watch the video. He gave all the evidence he has that was asked for. The other side responded by lying and saying that he is withholding evidence. And you are repeating this lie.

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

i did watch the video, he didn't say that. Then it started showing idiocrisy which was kind of cool, I liked that movie.

Do you have anything besides that video?

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

He did say that in the video. Others can watch the video and judge for themselves.

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

So nothing else? I have another question, so do you think he was right to not fight it? Do you agree with the strategy to say he had free speech, was just mistaken with his opinion, and to blame it on psychosis? Wouldn't it have been better to show facts about the sandy hook case and try to show it was some sort of false flag or that the media did lie about it? Is that maybe why they didn't allow it to be shown to a jury and just a judge? I'm not a lawyer and I'm not sure what determines what cases get a jury and which ones don't. I only really saw a judge when I had speeding tickets and I guess a jury just isn't necessary for that.

[–]fschmidt 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Do you agree with the strategy to say he had free speech, was just mistaken with his opinion,

Yes, because this is the truth.

Is that maybe why they didn't allow it to be shown to a jury and just a judge?

Denial of trial by jury violates the constitution. But the scum in charge don't care about the constitution. They are ruthless scum only interested in power. Decent people should wake up and realize that the system is hopelessly corrupt and that America has become an evil cesspool that only deserves to be hated. Avoid the system and make plans to escape from America before it is too late.

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

the constitutional right to trial by jury is about criminals, but Alex was getting sued for money. I do agree this was about power and putting a chilling effect out towards those who question sandy hook and the bigger picture is not just sandy hook but questioning any of the fake news the MSM puts out. I just would have liked to see alex fight it and not just saying he made a mistake.

[–]tyranicaloverlord 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

When you have control over all the information of SH and refuse to release it, you cannot prove that it was a hoax. They have redacted everything, used legislation to prevent getting anything related to what happened. The whole thing stinks to high hell. They are just giving arbitrary awards to anyone suing Jones as an open wallet, it's fucked up. He has to admit it was a mistake or they sue him over and over again with an automatic award.

You know how you make it all go away? Show the pictures of the dead kids piled up in the closet. Show Adam Lanza's dead body and autopsy. Show his mothers dead body and autopsy. They can't, because they do not exist, and it never happened.

[–]jet199 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

You're right.

He should just pay up and save the legal fees.

He could make a film about how he fucked up and make all the money back.

[–]Popper[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I wonder if he is having money problems and can't pay now. I can't imagine anyone going to his infowars website or giving him money after he admitted in court the sandy hook thing happened, I mean he acted so sure it didn't in all his rants before. And it was sketchy so I think some sort of conspiracy happened with it but Alex ain't saying that in court.

[–]monkeymagic 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

anyone that’s followed hook even remotely closely over the years understands that it was an attack on freedom of information, among other things (but FOIA first and foremost).

jones position on hook has been intentionally bonkers from the start, like a naked clown riding his bike visibly wasted. it’s all for show and so are these “lawsuits”. jones is and always has been overt, in your face controlled opposition. he’s a fucking jackass and he owes us all an apology that is literally never coming.